Personal Posts – Page 2

Researching The Site – Part II

Jordan Benjamin Holland / March 5, 2013May 12, 2013 / Personal Posts

After discovering that the Common was used to test Military Aircraft, I decided to use the remainder of my time at the Lincolnshire Archives to further investigate the presence of the Military at the Lincolnshire Grandstand and in doing so, I discovered the following document at the Lincolnshire Archives.

The above photographs are of a document which refers to the death of the Red Baron.

There was nothing written or printed on the document which suggested when it was written, nor who by, other than the words written on the front of the document which read:

THE END OF THE RED BARON

BARON VON RICHTHOFEN

Presented to the Workers in the Aircraft Works

AS A SOUVENIR OF THEIR PARTICIPATION IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE “CAMEL” B7270

Clayton & Shuttleworth Ltd. Lincoln.

As stated in my previous post ‘Researching The Site – Part I’ Clayton & Shuttleworth built aircraft which were tested on the Common opposite the Lincoln Grandstand.

The following is a picture of the “Camel” which the front of the document refers to.

The text in the document goes into small detail about an encounter between British pilots, the Red Baron and the aerial combat which followed. It also claims that a Sopwith “Camel” was responsible for the death of the Red Baron.

The account found in the document could become integrated into my performance because the aircraft allegedly responsible for destroying the Red Baron may have been one of the aircraft which Clayton & Shuttleworth tested at the Common. However, the Lincolnshire Archives had no more documentation regarding this claim, so I have no evidence other than the account found within the document in question, so for the moment this idea will be put on hold.

Researching The Site – Part I

Jordan Benjamin Holland / March 5, 2013May 12, 2013 / Personal Posts

In order for me to expand my knowledge of the Lincoln Grandstand I visited the Lincolnshire Archives. During my time there I discovered one of the roles the Lincoln Grandstand was used for – the Common opposite the Lincoln Grandstand was used to test Military aircraft during The First World War.

The above photograph is a book found at the Lincolnshire Archives.

“Besides Ruston aircraft, the Common was also used to test Robey-built Sopwith Gunbus machines and, later, Bristol F2Bs built by Marshall of Gainsborough and Handley Page aircraft built by Clayton and Shuttleworth.” ((Walls, John (1974) Ruston Aircraft Production A Souvenir of Ruston’s 1,000th Aeroplane Lincoln: AERO LITHO COMPANY (Lincoln) LTD.))

This quote, taken from the book pictured above it, clearly presents evidence that the Common was used to test Military Aircraft. This link between the Lincoln Grandstand and the Military connects with one of the concepts I am pursuing for my performance and that is the concept of becoming one with those who came before you. I now have a potential theme for my performance – the Military.

Site and Sense Part 1

Phoebe Wall-Palmer / February 24, 2013May 12, 2013 / Personal Posts, Women of War

Experimenting with the senses is something that is hugely inciting for any performer or director. Theatre tends to be a visual medium, whether it’s a physical piece with elements of dance and using the body to create art, or the West End where it’s often the spectacle of the grand stage that attracts audiences. This is also combined with the aural sense, from the music in a piece, to a single voice from centre stage entering into a monologue.

In class we formed a small group and took an element, or theme from the Grandstand as inspiration for a short performance. We created a piece that insisted on one of these major senses being removed or reduced and fused this with the theme of war. Making the room dark, with very limited visibility, we played audio of a sewing machine, Vera Lynn and Judy Garland singing war-time songs and a very faint sound of bombing. Simultaneously, we sprayed perfume on ‘love notes’ and kissed them with red lipstick on, before putting them in front of one of the audience members. We wanted to experiment with how the other senses would be heightened or warped because sight was limited.

The feedback from the audience suggested that the audio of the sewing machine sounded heavy and mechanical and when juxtaposed with the uplifting war-time song and the smell of vanilla from the perfume it created a stirring and effective contrast. When the lights were turned back on, the audience then saw the generically feminine kiss, in red lipstick. It meant there was a focus on the women in war. We discussed how the war, in many respects, gave women a sense of importance as they contributed to help there country, in the same light as the men fighting on the front line.

Rotozaza’s Etiquette is an example of using the aural sense to create a piece that challenges the participants/audience to trust in an unfamiliar voice, and transfer the voice into actions: ‘Etiquette exposes human communication at both its rawest and most delicate and explores the difficulty of turning our thoughts into words we can trust.’ ((Rotozaza (2007) Etiquette/Rotozaza’s Micro/Autoteatro Work, Online: http://www.rotozaza.co.uk/etiquette2.html [accessed 23 February 2013])) Rotozaza communicates the lack of confidence we have to act on our own thoughts. Etiquette allows for the participants to be directed by what feels like our own inner thoughts. Journalist, Jason Zinoman for The New York Times, also highlights the ‘way around the problem of pesky performers by giving the audience something else to look at: themselves.’ ((Zinoman, Jason (2007) ‘A Two Character Play Starring Both Members of the Audience’, The New York Times, Online: http://theater.nytimes.com/2007/08/08/theater/08frin.html?_r=0&adxnnl=1&pagewanted=print&adxnnlx=1361744832-aav9iGUW/96EAQVDQ40abA [accessed 23 February 2013])) Rotozaza’s work is arguably so thought provoking because the audience is in the performance- they make the performance. Generally, the best way to learn from something is to experience it for oneself.

In our piece we wanted the audience members to sit around the room, with no order or centre focus, as there was nothing to see visually. With the audience all around and between us, we hoped that the experience would surround them, so that they felt within the performance, in the same light as Etiquette. It would be interesting to experiment with the sound recordings playing on headphones and wearing a blindfold. Or, to make it a one-to-one experience, an audience member could just be in the room, in the dark by themself. Rotozaza suggests there is a ‘resulting thrill of disowning responsibility in a performance situation.’ ((Rotozaza (2007) Etiquette/Rotozaza’s Micro/Autoteatro Work, Online: http://www.rotozaza.co.uk/etiquette2.html [accessed 23 February 2013])) Therefore, the use of headphones, for example, would allow the audience to trust the sound and be coerced into whatever or wherever the performance wants to take them.

First Impressions…

Phoebe Wall-Palmer / February 12, 2013May 13, 2013 / Personal Posts, Women of War

‘I don’t particularly mind waste, but I think it’s a pity not to know what one is wasting. Some old ladies use pound notes as bookmarks: This is silly only if it is absent-minded.’ ((Brook, Peter (2008) The Empty Space, London: Penguin Classics, p. 45))

Walking through an open space, or down a street, the details are missed. Of course it’s not until you consciously look for something that you notice the details, the intricacies of both the man-made and the natural. You also begin to develop something seemingly uninteresting into an installation piece, or as if there was motive behind randomly placed coincidences. I guess we can all find art in anything; it’s how you perceive it.

Our first visit to the Grandstand conjured the same feeling: what was waste and what was wanted?

‘In what guise do I visit?’ ((Pearson, Mike (2010) Site-Specific Performance, London: Palgrave Macmillan, p. 19)), is a question Mike Pearson suggests asking oneself before visiting a site. As students, we have the intention and motive in finding potential for art, in a place that could have been previously neglected. An employee of Lincoln County Council guided us around the rooms of the Grandstand. He told us what he could about the history of the site, but seemed bemused by our excitement of the small, ostensibly insignificant, aspects to each room.

‘Yet with the freedom to loiter, to witness and interpret passing scenes and incidents, diverse activities, unpredictable juxtapositions, fleeting occurrences, multifarious sights and sounds… Gazing, grazing, consuming.’ ((Ibid, p. 20))

We all began finding interesting spaces, with the original architecture in mind; we could place performance and art within the existing walls. For example, the corridor below stretched along half of the length of the building. The natural darkness and eeriness invited the possibility of using projections, or introducing light in different ways to transform a corridor into a performance. The particular space is currently wasted. This allowed us to see a blank canvas for a performance potential.

One of the rooms in particular seemed to inspire and surprise all of us. The war memorial below encouraged a whole new strand to our ideas, originally thinking that horse racing would be at the forefront of our research and the final piece.

It was not long before we all felt passionate that the Grandstand deserved to have a voice returned to it. Another of Pearson’s questions to consider is: ‘am I simply enthralled by the place? Or is it difficult to know where it ends and I begin?’ ((Ibid, p. 21)) After I left the site I felt some sort of ownership and pride in the Grandstand, I was enthralled by it’s history and potential for our work. The whole site is wasted now, only used for the odd fitness class or brass band rehearsal- it is not being celebrated and treated with the grandeur it deserves; it is the gateway to Lincoln. It’s an exciting prospect to think that we will become part of its history.

On Site Drifting

Jordan Benjamin Holland / February 6, 2013May 12, 2013 / Personal Posts

Today we had a session at the Lincoln Grandstand, which has become our performance site. We were given one task to carry out and a few questions to ponder and note down our thoughts whilst on site.

The task was – To seek out traces, archaeological traces of other (former) visitors and occupants. This task is modified from a question of the same wording found in the following source ((Pearson, M (2010) Site-Specific Performance Palgrave Macmillan: London. Page 21))

The questions were – How am I affected? What do I feel? What do I perceive? What do I experience? How far is this informed by predispositions and previous experience? To what do I attend – natural landscape, built environment, sky as well as land, night as well as day and in foul weather as well as fare? Upon my return, how do I reconstitute ‘there’ here? These questions were taken from the following source ((Pearson, M (2010) Site-Specific Performance Palgrave Macmillan: London. Page 22))

When I first got on site I began to look for any traces of people being at the site at any period in time. The following pictures are what I documented whilst carrying out this task.

This first photograph is of some rubbish left by a person who was on the site.

This photograph of the sign ‘Main Entrance’ would only need to be in place if people use the site. Because it is in place, people clearly are using the site.

This photograph is of disabled parking bays, which is strong evidence that this site is in use.

This photograph of a ‘Drop Off Point’ is another piece of evidence to suggest that the site is regularly used.

Similar to the two photographs above, this is an image of the car park. If the site was not in use why would there be a car park?

This is a photograph of a bench found on site, so whoever it was that erected the bench is trying to make the site appealing for visitors who may use the site for a picnic.

This final image is of a visitor to the site’s car. This is the strongest piece of evidence that there are other people beside myself and our class using the site.

The above photographs are of my first attempt at seeking out traces, archaeological traces of other (former) visitors and occupants. The first photograph showing the remains of what was left by someone on site leading up to the last photograph of someone on site. However, it wasn’t until I really started to search closer on the actual site itself that I realized there were clearly traces of others who had been there before me. The following photographs are what I documented of these new traces.

Someone called ‘Danny’ from what I could make out was leaving his mark of being on site.

Next to Danny’s mark was the mark of ‘Jenny’ who had also been on the site.

An anonymous drifter perhaps? Whoever they were, they too left their mark on the site.

Possibly builders leaving a mark of where underground wires are? They too left their mark on site.

Could this mark have been left by the same person who left the above mark?

Maybe some children chalked up a goal on the wall? They left their mark on the site as well.

Although I could not make out the names on the stone, this photograph is of a memorial stone placed within the site’s architecture. I presume that the names are those who were most involved in erecting the site.

After discovering the traces shown above I had some answers to the questions we had been asked.

How am I affected? I was inspired by these traces of previous visitors. I see them as a way of trying to be remembered, as if by leaving your mark on a site you are some how leaving a memory of yourself being there for others to see.

What do I feel? I felt that, like those who came before me, through the photographs I had taken at the site, I was leaving my mark at the site as well. The photographs are evidence that I had been at the site as well.

What do I perceive? There were lots of visual marks of past visitors, it was as if I was in an art gallery looking at other peoples’ signatures.

What do I experience? I experienced 2 strong feelings. The first was the thought that people wanted to be remembered. As if the goal wasn’t to live forever, but instead to create a lasting memory in other people’s minds, even those who had never met them. The second was that as I was taking more photographs, and gathering more evidence that I had been to the site as well, I was becoming amalgamated with those who had been before me, as if we were all one collective. We were all drifters and this was our site.

How far is this informed by predispositions and previous experience? I had never been to the site before, I had only heard a small part of the site’s history but nothing specific about the site in terms of it’s aesthetics, so I went with as open a mind as I could.

To what do I attend – natural landscape, built environment, sky as well as land, night as well as day and in foul weather as well as fare? I struggled with this question initially, but after finding all of the traces on the walls, many of which had already stood the test of the weather, I decided that it didn’t matter what natural or man made circumstances occurred on site, only that these traces were not disturbed.

Upon my return, how do I reconstitute ‘there’ here? For this I drew a marking on a piece of paper which read ”Jonny Was Ere’ to illustrate my idea that people leave markings to be remembered.

I feel that investigating the 2 concepts of 1) leaving your own mark on the site and 2) becoming one with those who came before you will enable me to produce a performance on the site, for the site and inspired by the site.